Its been a good run

[Seth]

51 minutes ago, wcb said:

I have the same issues and wonder if adding the BSR system to the Mooney is even a real option (slap the experimental tag on it or field approval).

The gear/seats would have to be redesigned I think for the impact forces.  That may not be true, but that's my though process.

Then again, there are aftermarket BSR parachutes for Cessna's, so, maybe it's not as difficult as I think.

I do believe the redesign of the tubular roll cage, and fiberglass shell goes down a parallel path of allowing for some sort of BSR potentially in the future.  Before adding 60+ lbs of weight however, a weight shaving program must take place, or approval of a higher gross weight, which means other engineering (gear, etc).

-Seth

[exM20K]

5 hours ago, wcb said:

I have the same issues and wonder if adding the BSR system to the Mooney is even a real option (slap the experimental tag on it or field approval).

Probably impossible.  finding anchor points, a safe place to stash the rocket, remaining useful load, etc, etc.

 

I'd suggest instead getting a glider rating if you don't have one.  It is liberating to fly w/o power and takes away a lot of the "pucker factor" surrounding engine failure.  I get it that SO's and non-pilot pax may *feel* safer with the 'chute, but I really wouldn't.  I sometimes regret selling my Diamond motorglider.

-dan

[neilpilot]

31 minutes ago, exM20K said:

Probably impossible.  finding anchor points, a safe place to stash the rocket, remaining useful load, etc, etc.

 

I'd suggest instead getting a glider rating if you don't have one.  It is liberating to fly w/o power and takes away a lot of the "pucker factor" surrounding engine failure.  I get it that SO's and non-pilot pax may *feel* safer with the 'chute, but I really wouldn't.  I sometimes regret selling my Diamond motorglider.

-dan

I discussed this with the Mooney folks at last week's Summit, and they indicated that the Mooney airframe would not support a BRS-type device.

[bradp]

You’d think with the composite fuselage on the ultras they’d be able to make the design change relatively easily.  

Titanium gear truss and roll cage would save about 40% weight but increase cost for the materials what 10-fold.  

[Cooperd0g]

The other thing is that the BRS system also relies on the fixed gear systems to absorb some of the impact. Without the landing gear there to add to the crumple factor, there is going to be a larger impulse on fuselage impact. Remember, it isn't the speed that kills, it is the sudden impact. Anything that can be done to reduce the deceleration forces makes it more survivable. It might be very difficult to engineer retractable gear with the same crumple capability as fixed gear. And that would be on top of fuselage changes needed. 

Regardless, if we end up having another kid then I might be out of the Mooney game in the future as well if we ever plan on taking the dog with us. 

Edited October 8, 2018 by Cooperd0g

[xcrmckenna]

If they were able to slow the decent of the plane down with bigger or more efficient parachutes wouldn’t that help the crumple zone of a Mooney’s short stubby landing gear? Have it designed where a third or fourth chute doesn’t fold out till it starts the decent. I could never jump out of a plane so I know JACK about parachutes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bonal]

Well George, first congrats on a fine looking four blade prop. The rest of it looks nice too. George are you still affiliated with AOPA, if so I have a question. As for the cirrus parachute I know it would vary with conditions but does anyone know the impact speed when it hits ground. And therefore how much energy has to be absorbed by the gear and seats.

[Deb]

6 hours ago, bonal said:

As for the cirrus parachute I know it would vary with conditions but does anyone know the impact speed when it hits ground. And therefore how much energy has to be absorbed by the gear and seats.

According to the Cirrus “Guide to Cirrus Airframe Parachute (“CAPS”)” https://cirrusaircraft.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/CAPS_Guide.pdf “The airplane will descend under the canopy at less than 1700 fpm and ground impact is expected to be equivalent to dropping from a height of 13 feet (about 4 meters). The airframe, seats and landing gear are all designed to absorb the impact energy.”

[mike_elliott]

6 hours ago, Deb said:

The airplane will descend under the canopy at less than 1700 fpm and ground impact is expected to be equivalent to dropping from a height of 13 feet (about 4 meters)

Roy Lopresti died from falling off his roof cleaning gutters, a height less than 13 feet.

[wcb]

42 minutes ago, mike_elliott said:

Roy Lopresti died from falling off his roof cleaning gutters, a height less than 13 feet.

DId not know that interesting fact.  Thanks Cliff Clavin!

[ArtVandelay]

Mooney could design the landing gear to be dropped when pulling the chute, it would help slow down and keep the plane in the speed envelope.

[GeorgePerry]

On 10/9/2018 at 6:04 PM, bonal said:

Well George, first congrats on a fine looking four blade prop. The rest of it looks nice too. George are you still affiliated with AOPA, if so I have a question. As for the cirrus parachute I know it would vary with conditions but does anyone know the impact speed when it hits ground. And therefore how much energy has to be absorbed by the gear and seats.

I am no longer affiliated with AOPA, nor am I a member

As to your question about passenger condition, this is extensively documented on the COPA safety section of their website.  But to summarize, for "in envelope" deployments the vast majority of passengers walk away from a CAPS landing with few if any injuries.  

https://www.cirruspilots.org/copa/safety_programs/w/safety_pages/720.caps-saves-and-fatal-accidents.aspx?1

[NotarPilot]

On 10/10/2018 at 5:02 AM, mike_elliott said:

Roy Lopresti died from falling off his roof cleaning gutters, a height less than 13 feet.

Yeah but did he have an airframe, seats and landing gear to absorb the impact energy from the fall?

[Guest]

This video of a Cirrus landing under the CAPS was posted here some time ago.  While not a gentle landing, they hopped out and walked away.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nJO6j3eP0Tk

 

Clarence

[M20F]

Cirrus makes a nice plane aside from the front seats being uncomfortable and hand flying sucks.  I did like the Avidyne 9 system it is definitely a great and efficient cross country cruiser.  The seats and the belts that come with them after about 2hrs really suck.  This is coming from a guy in a M20F where seats suck as well.